PDA

View Full Version : Yes, There Could Be Serious Legal Problems if Obama Admin Involved in Illegal Surveillance




Mordan
03-06-2017, 02:17 PM
Good article with precise analysis from lawnewz.com.


President Trump recently tweeted claiming that former President Obama wiretapped him during his campaign. One can only imagine how nuts the media would have gone if the roles had been reversed: President Trump wiretapping either Obama or the Clintons, though his DOJ could have authority to do just that given the expansive leaks of intelligence information by Obama and Clinton supporters the last few months. Heck, he could wiretap the media at this point, legally and legitimately, as the sources of these unlawful leaks, for which Obama himself set precedent. Do liberals understand what Pandora’s Box Obama opened up by Obama using the powers of the NSA, CIA and FBI to spy on his political opponents? Even Nixon never did that.

If the stories are correct, Obama or his officials might even face prosecution. But, we are still early in all of this and there are a lot of rumors flying around so the key is if the reports are accurate. We just don’t know at this time. The stories currently are three-fold: first, that Obama’s team tried to get a warrant from a regular, Article III federal court on Trump, and was told no by someone along the way (maybe the FBI), as the evidence was that weak or non-existent; second, Obama’s team then tried to circumvent the federal judiciary’s independent role by trying to mislabel the issue one of “foreign agents,” and tried to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act “courts”, and were again turned down, when the court saw Trump named (an extremely rare act of FISA court refusal of the government, suggesting the evidence was truly non-existent against Trump); and so, third, Obama circumvented both the regular command of the FBI and the regularly appointed federal courts, by placing the entire case as a FISA case (and apparently under Sally Yates at DOJ) as a “foreign” case, and then omitted Trump’s name from a surveillance warrant submitted to the FISA court, which the FISA court unwittingly granted, which Obama then misused to spy on Trump and many connected to Trump. Are these allegations true? We don’t know yet, but if any part of them are then Obama and/or his officials could face serious trouble.

Can a President be charged with a crime? Only once out of office. While in office, impeachment remains the exclusive remedy in order to avoid a single judicial branch trying to overturn an election, such as a grand jury in any part of the country could. Once out of office, a President remains immune from civil liability for his duties while President, under a 1982 decision of the United States Supreme Court. However, as the Nixon pardon attests, nothing forecloses a criminal prosecution of the President after his presidency is complete for crimes against the country. Obama, the Constitutional lawyer, should know that.

What crimes could have been committed? Ironically, for Democrats falsely accusing Attorney General Sessions, perjury and conspiracy to commit perjury, as well as intentional violations of FISA. Rather shockingly, no law currently forbids misusing the power of the presidency to spy on one’s adversaries. What the law does forbid is lying to any judicial officer to obtain any means of surveillance. What the law does forbid, under criminal penalty, is the misuse of FISA. Both derive from the protections of the Fourth Amendment itself. Under section 1809, FISA makes it a crime for anyone to either “engage in” electronic surveillance under “color of law” under FISA without following the law’s restrictions, or “disclose” or “use” information gathered from it in contravention of the statute’s sharp constrictions.

FISA, 50 USC 1801, et seq., is a very limited method of obtaining surveillance authority. The reason for its strict limits is that FISA evades the regular federal court process, by not allowing regularly, Constitutionally appointed federal judges and their magistrates to authorize surveillance the Fourth Amendment would otherwise forbid. Instead, the Chief Justice handpicks the FISA court members, who have shown an exceptional deference to the executive branch. This is because FISA court members trust the government is only bringing them surveillance about pending terror attacks or “grave hostile” war-like attacks, as the FISA statute limits itself to. Thus, a FISA application can only be used in very limited circumstances.

One important reminder about electronic surveillance. Occasionally, a law enforcement officer will hear or see or record information not allowed by the warrant, but incidental or accidental to otherwise lawful surveillance. Their job is to immediately stop listening, stop recording, and to delete such information. This is what you occasionally see in films where the agent in the van hears the conversation turn away from something criminal to a personal discussion, and the agent then turns off the listening device and stops the recording. Such films simply recognize long-standing legal practice.

FISA can only be used for “foreign intelligence information.” Now that sounds broad, but is in fact very limited under the law. The only “foreign intelligence information” allowed as a basis for surveillance is information necessary to protect the United States against actual or potential “grave” “hostile” attack, war-like sabotage or international terror. Second, it can only be used to eavesdrop on conversations where the parties to the conversation are a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power. An agent of a foreign power cannot be a United States person unless they are knowingly involved in criminal espionage. No warrant is allowed on that person unless a FISA court finds probable cause the United States person is knowingly engaged in criminal espionage. Even then, if it involves a United States person, special steps must be taken to “minimize the acquisition and retention, and prohibit the dissemination, of non publicly available information concerning un-consenting United States persons.”

This includes procedures that require they never identify the person, or the conversation, being surveilled, to the public where that information is not evidence of a particular crime. Third, the kind of information sought concerns solely information about a pending or actual attack on the country. That is why the law limits itself to sabotage incidents involving war, not any form or kind of “sabotage,” explicitly limiting itself to those acts identified in section 105 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

This bring us to Watergate-on-Steroids, or #ObamaGate. Here are the problematic aspects of the Obama surveillance on Trump’s team, and on Trump himself. First, it is not apparent FISA could ever be invoked. Second, it is possible Obama’s team may have perjured themselves before the FISA court by withholding material information essential to the FISA court’s willingness to permit the government surveillance. Third, it could be that Obama’s team illegally disseminated and disclosed FISA information in direct violation of the statute precisely prohibiting such dissemination and disclosure. FISA prohibits, under criminal penalty, Obama’s team from doing any of the three.

At the outset, the NSA should have never been involved in a domestic US election. Investigating the election, or any hacking of the DNC or the phishing of Podesta’s emails, would not be a FISA matter. It does not fit the definition of war sabotage or a “grave” “hostile” war-like attack on the United States, as constrictively covered by FISA. It is your run-of-the-mill hacking case covered by existing United States laws that require use of the regular departments of the FBI, Department of Justice, and Constitutionally Senate-appointed federal district court judges, and their appointed magistrates, not secretive, deferential FISA courts.

Out of 35,000+ requests for surveillance, the FISA court has only ever rejected a whopping 12. Apparently, according to published reports, you can add one more to that — even the FISA court first rejected Obama’s request to spy on Trump’s team under the guise of an investigation into foreign agents of a pending war attack, intelligence agents apparently returned to the court, where, it is my assumption, that they did not disclose or divulge all material facts to the court when seeking the surveillance the second time around, some of which they would later wrongfully disseminate and distribute to the public. By itself, misuse of FISA procedures to obtain surveillance is itself, a crime.

This raises the second problem: Obama’s team submission of an affidavit to to the FISA court. An application for a warrant of any kind requires an affidavit, and that affidavit may not omit material factors. A fact is “material” if it could have the possible impact of impacting the judicial officer deciding whether to authorize the warrant. Such affidavits are the most carefully drawn up, reviewed, and approved affidavits of law enforcement in our system precisely because they must be fully-disclosing, forthcoming, and include any information a judge must know to decide whether to allow our government to spy on its own. My assumption would be that intelligence officials were trying to investigate hacking of DNC which is not even a FISA covered crime, so therefore serious questions arise about what Obama administration attorneys said to the FISA court to even consider the application. If the claim was “financial ties” to Russia, then Obama knew he had no basis to use FISA at all.

Since Trump was the obvious target, the alleged failure to disclose his name in the second application could be a serious and severe violation of the obligation to disclose all material facts. Lastly, given the later behavior, it is evident any promise in the affidavit to protect the surveilled information from ever being sourced or disseminated was a false promise, intended to induce the illicit surveillance. This is criminalized both by federal perjury statutes, conspiracy statutes, and the FISA criminal laws themselves.

That raises the third problem: it seems the FISA-compelled protocols for precluding the dissemination of the information were violated, and that Obama’s team issued orders to achieve precisely what the law forbids, if published reports are true about the administration sharing the surveilled information far-and-wide to promote unlawful leaks to the press. This, too, would be its own crime, as it brings back the ghost of Hillary’s emails — by definition, FISA information is strictly confidential or it’s information that never should have been gathered. FISA strictly segregates its surveilled information into two categories: highly confidential information of the most serious of crimes involving foreign acts of war; or, if not that, then information that should never have been gathered, should be immediately deleted, and never sourced nor disseminated. It cannot be both.

Recognizing this information did not fit FISA meant having to delete it and destroy it. According to published reports, Obama’s team did the opposite: order it preserved, ordered the NSA to search it, keep it, and share it; and then Obama’s Attorney General issued an order to allow broader sharing of information and, according to the New York Times, Obama aides acted to label the Trump information at a lower level of classification for massive-level sharing of the information. The problem for Obama is simple — if it could fit a lower level of classification, then it had to be deleted and destroyed, not disseminated and distributed, under crystal clear FISA law. Obama’s team’s admission it could be classified lower, yet taking actions to insure its broadest distribution, could even put Obama smack-middle of the biggest unlawful surveillance and political-opponent-smear campaign since Nixon. Except even Nixon didn’t use the FBI and NSA for his dirty tricks.

Watergate would have never happened if Nixon felt like he could just ask the FBI or NSA to tape the calls. This is Hoover-esque abuses of the kind Bob Woodward pal, former FBI Assistant Director Mark Felt (otherwise known as Deep Throat), routinely engaged in at the FBI until convicted and removed from office. (You didn’t know that Deep Throat was really a corrupt part of Deep State, did you? Guess who ran the famous COINTELPRO? That’s right — Deep Throat. How would the public have reacted if they knew the media had been in bed with the deep state all the way back then? Maybe that was the reason Woodward, Bernstein and Bradley kept Deep Throat’s identity secret all those years?)

Democrats may regret Sessions’ recusal, as his replacement is a mini-Sessions: a long-respected, a-political, highly ethical prosecutor, Dana Boente, whose reputation is well-warranted from his service at the Tax Division, and who won’t be limited by any perceived ties to Trump, given his prior appointment by Obama. Obama himself appeared scared of Boente, as he removed Boente from the successor-to-Sessions position during the lame-duck part of Obama’s presidency, but Trump restored Boente to that role earlier this month. Democrats may get the investigation they wanted, but it may be their own that end up named in the indictment.

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/yes-obama-could-be-prosecuted-if-involved-with-illegal-surveillance/

TheCount
03-06-2017, 02:29 PM
Should I add this to the list of definitely happening investigations which are certainly going someplace?

Currently tracking investigations:

Clinton foundation money
Pizzagate
3-5 million illegal votes
Leaks to press in administration
Obama DOJ money
Obama wiretap

Am I missing any of the definitely in progress investigations which will result in indictments any day now?

Zippyjuan
03-06-2017, 06:31 PM
Should I add this to the list of definitely happening investigations will are certainly going someplace?

Currently tracking investigations:

Clinton foundation money
Pizzagate
3-5 million illegal votes
Leaks to press in administration
Obama DOJ money
Obama wiretap

Am I missing any of the definitely in progress investigations which will result in indictments any day now?

Keep them tied up so they aren't checking that Russian thing. Change the subject.

oyarde
03-06-2017, 06:35 PM
Keep them tied up so they aren't checking that Russian thing. Change the subject.

I am a little curious about the DOJ money .

Swordsmyth
03-06-2017, 06:43 PM
Keep them tied up so they aren't checking that Russian thing. Change the subject.

LOL "The Russian Thing" is the Dem distraction.

However I do not commit to any of these going anywhere:
Clinton foundation money
Pizzagate
3-5 million illegal votes
Leaks to press in administration
Obama DOJ money
Obama wiretap

At least some of them should though.

unknown
03-07-2017, 01:08 AM
Of-course they were involved in illegal surveillance.

As was the Bush administration.

As Trump plans to do.

Like our government uses warrants.

We know theyve been conducting warrant-less spying, recording and monitoring all electronic communications without warrants.

But forget all that, lets focus on the incredibly small % of requests rubber stamped by FISA...?

timosman
03-07-2017, 02:05 AM
How crazy is FISA rejecting gov requests?:eek:

fedupinmo
03-07-2017, 09:22 AM
^^^ And 13 times, no less...


Should I add this to the list of definitely happening investigations will are certainly going someplace?

Currently tracking investigations:

Clinton foundation money
Pizzagate
3-5 million illegal votes
Leaks to press in administration
Obama DOJ money
Obama wiretap

Am I missing any of the definitely in progress investigations which will result in indictments any day now?

https://i.imgflip.com/1kxxas.jpg

shakey1
03-07-2017, 09:36 AM
Of-course they were involved in illegal surveillance.

As was the Bush administration.

As Trump plans to do.

Like our government uses warrants.

We know theyve been conducting warrant-less spying, recording and monitoring all electronic communications without warrants.

But forget all that, lets focus on the incredibly small % of requests rubber stamped by FISA...?

Yeah, they all do it... just more brazen about it now... or maybe just harder to conceal.

Contumacious
03-07-2017, 10:33 AM
Good article with precise analysis from lawnewz.com.



http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/yes-obama-could-be-prosecuted-if-involved-with-illegal-surveillance/

The Plot Thickens (https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/jarrett-from-within-white-house-may-have-launched-a-watergate-style-attack-on-trump-during-election/)

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Jarrett_Valerie.jpg


Valerie Jarrett's operation which was directed from the White House – not the Justice Department as being claimed. The Obama officials are not denying the covert operation, but are trying to paint it as a legitimate investigation of Trump launched by Lynch at the Justice Department to give deniability to Obama. Jarrett was a Senior Adviser to Obama between 2009 up until January 20th, 2017. She is a Chicago lawyer who previously has been tied to Obama and served as a co-chair of the Obama-Biden Transition Project.

Jarrett has joined Obama’s effort to help with an “insurgency” movement against President Donald Trump. Rumors also imply that both Chuck Schummer and Hillary knew of this investigation and were briefed, possibly by Jarrett or others in the White House.

in October 2016 before the election, the Obama administration submitted a new request that was more narrow to the FISA court which targeted a computer server in Trump Tower they alleged would show links to Russian banks. No such evidence was found and indeed it was a witch-hunt. However, the wiretaps continued claiming it was for national security to try to distinguish this from Watergate


Then NSA Director Michael Rogers participated in the sessions at Intelligence and National Security Summit in Washington. It turns out that Obama officially blamed Puttin on October 8th, 2016. Then on Thursday November 17th, 2016, Rogers traveled to New York and met with President-Elect Donald Trump after the election without informing others. Then the next day, the Washington Post reported on a recommendation in “October” that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position. This was a recommendation from the Pentagon and the NSA to President Obama that Rogers must be removed. This was delivered to Obama by Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. Reuters reported on November 19th, that Carter and Clapper demanded to fire Rogers. Rogers didn’t want to participate in the Obama spying scheme led by Clapper. All the information I was getting from behind the curtain warned that there was indeed a soft-coup against Trump that was organized by Obama and that Clapper was deeply involved. I warned this was being called the “Gang of Four” behind the curtain – absolutely unprecedented. Everyone knows I am very cautious not to get involved in conspiracy theories."


.

Athan
03-08-2017, 10:42 AM
Should I add this to the list of definitely happening investigations will are certainly going someplace?

Currently tracking investigations:

Clinton foundation money
Pizzagate?

What's a matter? Child predators just something to laugh at and dismiss?

https://i0.wp.com/washingtonlife.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/WL_150430_48.jpg
https://s29.postimg.org/48ikr7zfb/Biljana_Djurdjevic_in_Podesta_Home.png
http://ibankcoin.com/zeropointnow/files/2016/11/reallypizza.jpg

http://washingtonlife.com/2015/06/05/inside-homes-private-viewing/

TheCount
03-08-2017, 11:26 AM
Child predators just something to laugh at and dismiss?What child predators?

enhanced_deficit
03-08-2017, 11:53 AM
The Plot Thickens (https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/north_america/2016-u-s-presidential-election/jarrett-from-within-white-house-may-have-launched-a-watergate-style-attack-on-trump-during-election/)

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Jarrett_Valerie.jpg

.


To be fair, she was not an explicit member of "cry team".

http://truthfeed.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/OBAMA-STAFF.jpg

WHITE HOUSE STAFF ABSORBS TRUMP WIN NEWS

Athan
03-08-2017, 12:28 PM
What child predators?

I guess you do approve of it. Obviously the ones found through the wikileaks release of podesta email's dump.
I mean why else would you toss an article that is discussing the possible implications of a possible infringement of Donald Trump's 4th amendment rights? A scandal we don't yet know about with one where we do have a lot larger body of evidence.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 12:49 PM
What is up with the Russian obsession over Valerie Jarrett these days?

TheCount
03-08-2017, 01:16 PM
I guess you do approve of it. Obviously the ones found through the wikileaks release of podesta email's dump.Who has been found?


I mean why else would you toss an article that is discussing the possible implications of a possible infringement of Donald Trump's 4th amendment rights?I don't spend my time discussing the possible purchases that I will possibly make with my possible lottery winnings either. Illustrating all of the claims that Trump has made gives an idea of just how possible it is that the allegations he makes will actually find or result in anything whatsoever. He's 0 for 0 so far.


A scandal we don't yet know about with one where we do have a lot larger body of evidence.http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/982/077/839.png

timosman
03-08-2017, 01:18 PM
What is up with the Russian obsession over Valerie Jarrett these days?

This is a nice one Zip. Anybody who discusses VJ is a Russian spy.:rolleyes:

Athan
03-08-2017, 01:36 PM
Who has been found?

I don't spend my time discussing the possible purchases that I will possibly make with my possible lottery winnings either. Illustrating all of the claims that Trump has made gives an idea of just how possible it is that the allegations he makes will actually find or result in anything whatsoever. He's 0 for 0 so far.


And there's the rub, why toss Pizzagate with new Trump administration news that has yet to be fully learned? We don't know much about the new claim from Trump yet. *IF* true it is a violation of his 4th amendment rights. However thus far, with the Justice Department already seeking permission to wiretap, it isn't something that can be tossed aside.

Regardless of Trump's credibility you tried to discredit Wikileaks Pizzagate information that is known because of information provided by many people not relating to the Trump campaign who have been searching online and finding a lot of information on social media and others which has ties to people like James Alefantis, John Podesta, and Tony Podesta as a direct result of them talking in code in actual digital evidence of email conversations. Those three for instance are politically done or irrelevant when it comes to liberal democrats such as yourself vs. Trump. They can be tossed under the bus and it wouldn't damage or help Trump politically.

TheCount
03-08-2017, 01:45 PM
And there's the rub, why toss Pizzagate with new Trump administration news that has yet to be fully learned?

Because past performance is an indicator of future results. If a team has lost the last eight games, that affects how likely I think it is that they will win their next game.

Also, because there is zero evidence offered by the administration, and they have already punted the claim into the woods never to be heard from again. Within the Executive branch they have all of the powers and capabilities that they need to pursue all of these matters and yet they are not and will not. Why not, if there is any substance to the allegations?

This is basic critical thinking.



Regardless of Trump's credibility you tried to discredit Wikileaks Pizzagate information that is known because of information provided by many people not relating to the Trump campaign who have been searching online and finding a lot of information on social media and others which has ties to people like James Alefantis, John Podesta, and Tony Podesta as a direct result of them talking in code in actual digital evidence of email conversations. Those three for instance are politically done or irrelevant when it comes to liberal democrats such as yourself vs. Trump. They can be tossed under the bus and it wouldn't damage or help Trump politically.The sources of these claims are the same. The wiretap allegation did not originate with Trump. Also, once again for the word evidence:
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/982/077/839.png

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 02:15 PM
Are we talking evidence like evidence of the Russians hacking the election? Or evidence like evidence of the Russians secretly working with Trump? Kinda funny that we just found out the CIA has the ability to make it look like a foreign country did the hacking on their way back out the door, no?

TheCount
03-08-2017, 02:48 PM
Are we talking evidence like evidence of the Russians hacking the election? Or evidence like evidence of the Russians secretly working with Trump?The truth or lack thereof about claims about Russia and Trump have nothing do with the truth of Trump's allegations. "He made shit up about me so I get to make shit up about him" only counts as a good argument until middle school.

CPUd
03-08-2017, 02:58 PM
715277702517927936
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/715277702517927936

Athan
03-08-2017, 03:52 PM
Because past performance is an indicator of future results. If a team has lost the last eight games, that affects how likely I think it is that they will win their next game.

Also, because there is zero evidence offered by the administration, and they have already punted the claim into the woods never to be heard from again. Within the Executive branch they have all of the powers and capabilities that they need to pursue all of these matters and yet they are not and will not. Why not, if there is any substance to the allegations?

This is basic critical thinking.

The sources of these claims are the same. The wiretap allegation did not originate with Trump. Also, once again for the word evidence:

Are you daft? What does Trump's allegations of wiretapping have to do with Wikileaks and Pizzagate? I specifically told you, Pizzagate is something completely different. It has a body of evidence not simply a single piece of evidence. The evidence ranges from what the NYPD has discovered in Anthony Weiner's computer under the "Life Insurance" named folder and other saved back up of Clinton missing emails, social media, online behavior and suggestive statements. So much so, I'd have to make ANOTHER thread that was created to discuss and post evidence. So your evidence can be found here in this thread:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?504368-Do-you-believe-in-the-pizzagate-scandal

You want evidence? There you go, start there. I have provided it.

The onus is now on YOU to provide excuses and explanations for the odd and possibly the criminal behavior.

In fact, had it been Trump that was doing anything even remotely similar, you'd flip your $h!t. Hell CPU'd had posted Trump daughter sitting on one of his leg in a less offensive manner yet seemed to try to imply sexual innuendo. It is telling how you anti-Trump people bring up that, but here you are trying to dismiss Pizzagate like it's a conspiracy like flat earth or a fake moon landing cover up.

Nothing Trump has done has amounted to anything nearly as grievous, telling, and disturbing as those involved in Pizzagate. Yet you all act like he is the great satan, and dismiss allegations backed up by a LOT of disturbing facts of evil behavior.

https://www.sott.net/image/s17/357198/full/biljana_djurdjevic_serbia_pain.jpg

Here's a video of an honest covering of Pizzagate from non-other than Ben Swann who is WELL known in Ron Paul Forums even before this story.

https://youtu.be/oBSvUlkB61s

In REGARDS to Trump's allegation, any liberty minded person would be QUICKLY concerned if there were violations of a person's 4th amendment rights. Even if he were a liar, people have a right to privacy and against unlawful infringements upon their papers, effects. With Vault 7 being released, we know how far the government's capability and intent to spy on people is coming to light. And yes, much of it verifies what many of us suspected already. Yet, Trump's 4th amendment right is suddenly not a cause for concern? Really what are you even doing here on Ron Paul Forums and among liberty lovers?

Since you don't seem to have any libertarian thinking at all, clearly when it comes to this issue. I'll post the amendment since you may not know what we value here.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED. Not "unless you're Trump".

Jamesiv1
03-08-2017, 03:58 PM
This is a nice one Zip. Anybody who discusses VJ is a Russian spy.:rolleyes:
Dang Russkies!!!

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 04:50 PM
The truth or lack thereof about claims about Russia and Trump have nothing do with the truth of Trump's allegations. "He made $#@! up about me so I get to make $#@! up about him" only counts as a good argument until middle school.

What is your proof that Trump has no proof?

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 04:57 PM
What is your proof that Trump has no proof?

Can you find somebody other than Trump who claims to have actually seen it? His own FBI director says there is no evidence.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/donald-trump-wiretap-claim-barack-obama-james-comey-fbi-justice-department-a7613091.html


FBI chief James Comey 'urges Justice Department to publicly refute Donald Trump's wiretap claim'

FBI director James Comey has asked the Justice Department to reject publicly Donald Trump’s claim that Barack Obama wiretapped his communications, according to US media reports.

Senior officials close to Mr Comey said he has privately called on the department to dismiss the false claims, the New York Times reported, because they imply the FBI has acted illegally.

The President tweeted on Saturday that Mr Obama had ordered FBI agents to monitor communications coming in and out of Trump Tower in October, comparing it to "McCarthyism" and "Nixon/Watergate".

He gave no evidence to support his claim but a report by alt-right website Breitbart made the same allegation one day earlier – again citing no evidence or official sources.

On Sunday, the White House asked Congress to include the allegations in its investigation into whether Russia interfered in the election.

The Justice Department has yet to issue a formal statement on the matter.

Mr Comey privately said he believed there was no evidence to support Mr Trump's claim, US media reported. He will come under pressure from Democrats to come out with a public statement on the matter, as it is the FBI that would have records to show whether Mr Trump’s claims are true.

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 04:59 PM
Can you find somebody other than Trump who claims to have actually seen it?

The investigation hasn't even begun and everyone already has proof both ways, how is that staying neutral or having critical thinking? There has been no proof presented from either side, its all he said/she said. So again I ask what proof do you have there was no spying on Trump's team?

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 05:03 PM
The investigation hasn't even begun and everyone already has proof both ways, how is that staying neutral or having critical thinking? There has been no proof presented from either side, its all he said/she said. So again I ask what proof do you have there was no spying on Trump's team?

Obviously one cannot absolutely prove there is no evidence at all- that is impossible- you can't prove a negative- so the burden must be on somebody providing evidence that it did occur. None has been forthcoming.

(see my update where Trump's FBI director- who would be in a position to know and working for the President be likely to support his position on things- says he has not seen any evidence to support the claims)

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 05:07 PM
(see my update where Trump's FBI director says he has not seen any evidence to support the claims)

Come on man, did you even read it? That is the same BS I see Breitbart and all the others ripped on about "sources".


Senior officials close to Mr Comey said

That sounds legit.

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 05:10 PM
I really don't know one way or the other, I am looking for SOMEONE to provide proof of something either way.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 05:13 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-03-05/clapper-denies-trump-wiretap-as-white-house-demands-a-probe


Clapper Denies Trump Wiretapped as White House Demands Probe

Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said there was no wiretap activity directed against President Donald Trump or his campaign by the Obama administration, as Trump has claimed without evidence in calling for a Congressional investigation.

“I can deny it,” Clapper, weeks removed from serving as the top U.S. intelligence official, said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” when asked whether he could confirm or deny that a court order allowing for eavesdropping at Trump Tower in New York existed.

His comments contradicted explosive claims by Trump that President Barack Obama had the Republican’s “wires tapped in Trump Tower just before” the 2016 election. Trump relied on reports in conservative media, including Breitbart News, for his conclusion, a person familiar with the situation told Bloomberg.

Joining Clapper in knocking down Trump’s assertions was FBI Director James Comey, according to the New York Times. Comey asked Department of Justice officials on Saturday to issue a statement rejecting Trump’s claims that Obama had tapped his phones, arguing that the assertion is false, but the agency has not, the newspaper reported.

On Sunday, White House press secretary Sean Spicer called on Congress to investigate the wiretapping reports, but he offered no evidence to back the allegations. Democrats said the White House was trying to shift focus away from ongoing investigations into possible connections between the Trump campaign and Russia.



So we have intelligence and law enforcement officials from both parties saying there is no proof. It is unusual for people from both parties to agree. And to repeat- one cannot prove beyond a doubt that there is no proof but a President making such serious accusations should be able to provide proof of them. Anybody can claim anything they want to but it is up to them to prove it happened.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 05:24 PM
Trump's probable source:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/aliciamelvillesmith/trump-accuses-obama-of-wire-tapping-his-phones-during-the-el?utm_term=.bi3DZvo2D#.ufqaeoQxa


Trump Repeats Talk Radio Rumor That Obama Wiretapped Him During Election

Without offering a scintilla of evidence, President Donald Trump on Saturday accused former President Barack Obama of spying on him by ordering the wiretapping of phones in Trump Tower during the 2016 election campaign — a charge the former leader denied.

Like much of what Trump tweets, the Obama wiretap claim appears to have followed a path through the pro-Trump media. The president may have been referring to an article from alt-right media outlet Breitbart, which makes claims that Obama worked to undermine Trump during the election. The Breitbart story references a segment from conservative commentator Mark Levin’s Thursday night radio show in which he said Obama used surveillance techniques to gather information on Trump.

In a series of early morning tweets on Saturday, Trump shared the claims: “Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!

“Is it legal for a sitting President to be ‘wire tapping’ a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!”



Kinda scary that the President is getting his intelligence from talk radio.


Saturday’s tweets mark the second time in as many days that the president has parroted conservative media.

On Friday, Trump tweeted an image of Sen. Chuck Schumer, the top Senate Democrat, meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, mocking his calls for an investigation into the White House’s ties to Moscow.

The 2003 photo had been posted to a pro-Trump Reddit thread less than 24 hours before, where it then was circulated to right-wing blogs and websites, before eventually making its way to Trump’s official Twitter account.

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 05:26 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-03-05/clapper-denies-trump-wiretap-as-white-house-demands-a-probe



So we have intelligence and law enforcement officials from both parties saying there is no proof. It is unusual for people from both parties to agree. And to repeat- one cannot prove beyond a doubt that there is no proof but a President making such serious accusations should be able to provide proof of them. Anybody can claim anything they want to but it is up to them to prove it happened.

You know Clapper has a history of committing perjury right? Again no statement from Comey, its still hearsay you conveniently didn't highlight the part where it says "according to the New York Times". The Comey statement is another "according to senior officials" type of statement. Why won't he just say it publicly and get it over with?

Trump's proof would be in the form of a classified document. Which as I am sure you know cannot just be released publicly. He of course could declassify it but maybe he is going to use it as political leverage or he is setting up a court case. Would you hand over your evidence for a court case to the media before even an investigation has taken place?

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 05:27 PM
Trump's probable source:

https://www.buzzfeed.com/aliciamelvillesmith/trump-accuses-obama-of-wire-tapping-his-phones-during-the-el?utm_term=.bi3DZvo2D#.ufqaeoQxa



Kinda scary that the President is getting his intelligence from talk radio.

Levin's source was the New York Times, he only read their own articles and headlines.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 05:28 PM
Levin's source was the New York Times, he only read their own articles and headlines.

Link to the Times articles?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
03-08-2017, 05:34 PM
Link to the Times articles?

Look for it yourself?

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 05:36 PM
Link to the Times articles?

I'm not here to prove anything to anyone, I already stated I don't know what happened. Looks like you don't either, in reality you are no better than Trump: unsubstantiated claims. There is an equal number of people on both sides saying it likely did and didn't happen. So we need some sort of concrete proof either way which no one can provide.

I just want SOMEONE to prove something so we know what happened instead of this stupid dance of "sources said" and "senior officials close to X said" and "hey we got this guy that committed perjury who said". It is all hearsay right now.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 05:36 PM
Look for it yourself?

Thank you for your insightful addition to the discussion.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 05:37 PM
I'm not here to prove anything to anyone, I already stated I don't know what happened. Looks like you don't either, in reality you are no better than Trump: unsubstantiated claims. There is an equal number of people on both sides saying it likely did and didn't happen. So we need some sort of concrete proof either way which no one can provide.

I just want SOMEONE to prove something so we know what happened instead of this stupid dance of "sources said" and "senior officials close to X said" and "hey we got this guy that committed perjury who said". It is all hearsay right now.

So we need to refer it back to Trump. Put up or shut up. A serious allegation requires serious proof.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
03-08-2017, 05:40 PM
Thank you for your insightful addition to the discussion.


At least I make some additions and actually discuss things here.

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 05:40 PM
So we need to refer it back to Trump. Put up or shut up.

Of course he needs to provide something eventually but expecting it early on is naive as hell. The irony is that if they weren't spying on Trump, he would be the only person in the USA, maybe even the world, not being spied on by the US gov.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 05:41 PM
At least I make some additions and actually discuss things here.

And a very useful addition it was. It contributed significantly to the quality of the discussion on the topic at hand. Thanks!


Look for it yourself?

NorthCarolinaLiberty
03-08-2017, 05:42 PM
And a very useful addition it was. Thanks!


Even it that were the only one, it would still be one more than you've ever contributed here.

TheCount
03-08-2017, 05:56 PM
I specifically told you, Pizzagate is something completely different. It has a body of evidence not simply a single piece of evidence.http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/982/077/839.png




Nothing Trump has done has amounted to anything nearly as grievous, telling, and disturbing as those involved in Pizzagate.

Only children are interested in how good or bad something is in comparison to something else. "But Billy did it more!" is a convincing argument for a 5 year old.

What actually matters to adults is how good or bad something is on its own merits.

NorthCarolinaLiberty
03-08-2017, 05:59 PM
For child molesting liberals:

Child molesting < Anything Donny says or does that makes my butt hurt.

TheCount
03-08-2017, 06:05 PM
What is your proof that Trump has no proof?He has the capability to provide that proof to the American people but has not.

RPtotheWH
03-08-2017, 06:33 PM
He has the capability to provide that proof to the American people but has not.

That already been touched on, try to keep up.

TheCount
03-08-2017, 06:36 PM
That already been touched on, try to keep up.Your argument is bullshit. He has the ability to declassify anything he wants. It would be an Obama regime document that would make true everything he has ever said about the swamp. There is no valid reason for him not to declassify a document that important to the American people.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 07:40 PM
Your argument is bull$#@!. He has the ability to declassify anything he wants. It would be an Obama regime document that would make true everything he has ever said about the swamp. There is no valid reason for him not to declassify a document that important to the American people.

Technically a president cannot possibly release classified information. The moment he releases something, it is no longer classified.

Athan
03-08-2017, 10:17 PM
Only children are interested in how good or bad something is in comparison to something else. "But Billy did it more!" is a convincing argument for a 5 year old.

What actually matters to adults is how good or bad something is on its own merits.
No kiddo, it is an OBSERVABLE pattern of behavior you all are engaged in. We are aware of your odd double standards and I am pointing out that you are a bull$h!tting hypocrite. You know, so it isn't just we that are aware of it. Might as well make you aware of your own bull$h1t smell.

I mean look at you, you quickly moved to skirting any ability for you to begin refuting Pizzagate so you don't have to start refuting the coded language of the podesta emails. Or other items such as the the multiple instances of visual pedophile signalling within a small plaza in DC. Or the fact that Alefantis has had disturbing imagery of children in his instagram even though he has no children of his own. All you have is that image as a response like it means anything to me.

Don't run away from the fact you should start providing refutations and an analysis of why they have all these "coincidental" activities, pictures, images, emails, behaviors and etc.

https://img.4plebs.org/boards/pol/image/1480/05/1480054549593.png

I think we ALL deserve to here your analysis of what was going on with comet ping pong, alefantis, and the podesta brothers, as well as wikileaks pay for play schemes in the Clinton Foundation.

All you do is dismiss, but you don't provide solid reason to dismiss.

UWDude
03-08-2017, 10:32 PM
Clapper Denies Trump Wiretapped as White House Demands Probe

Zippy quotes Clapper, as evidence, folks.

They aren't sending their best.


Kinda scary that the President is getting his intelligence from talk radio.

Kinda scary he would get it from his enemies, and the enemy of the world, the CIA.

UWDude
03-08-2017, 10:33 PM
He has the capability to provide that proof to the American people but has not.

He has sent it to the house intelligence committee, as he feels that is the best way to deal with it.

And the house intelligence committee is already summoning people to testify on the subject.

Athan
03-08-2017, 10:41 PM
Zippy quotes Clapper, as evidence, folks.

They aren't sending their best.

Lol I know. Had they trained the shills right, they would have known we distrust LYING UNDER OATH Clapper greatly from the whole Snowden debacle. Or maybe he forgot. You know "not wittingly"?

UWDude
03-08-2017, 10:48 PM
Lol I know. Had they trained the shills right, they would have known we distrust LYING UNDER OATH Clapper greatly from the whole Snowden debacle. Or maybe he forgot. You know "not wittingly"?

ha ha. he even bolded it, to give it emphasis.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 10:48 PM
Zippy quotes Clapper, as evidence, folks.

They aren't sending their best.


Kinda scary he would get it from his enemies, and the enemy of the world, the CIA.

Don't forget Trump's own FBI director also says there is no evidence to support the claim.

UWDude
03-08-2017, 10:49 PM
Don't forget Trump's own FBI director also says there is no evidence to support the claim.

proof?

UWDude
03-08-2017, 10:50 PM
So , next, zippy posts a fake news article that says Comey said something, even though Comey hasn't publicly said anything yet.

Furthermore, all Comey has supposedly said, according to fake news, is that he wants the DoJ to deny it. Something he knows they can't do.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 11:01 PM
So , next, zippy posts a fake news article that says Comey said something, even though Comey hasn't publicly said anything yet.

Furthermore, all Comey has supposedly said, according to fake news, is that he wants the DoJ to deny it. Something he knows they can't do.

What is "real news"? Breitbart? Which is run by a man working directly for Trump?

Of course if you want to argue unconfirmed reports, Trump has not confirmed or provided any evidence of his claims. They too are "fake news" and heresay at this point.

timosman
03-08-2017, 11:03 PM
What is "real news"? Breitbart?

What is the point of you arguing on this site? Your secret fan base will admire you more?:cool:

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 11:05 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/06/donald-trump-does-not-believe-james-comeys-insistence-trump/


Donald Trump 'does not believe FBI' - President steps up attack over 'wire tapping' under Barack Obama


President Donald Trump does not believe FBI director James Comey’s insistence that Trump Tower was not wiretapped, a White House spokeswoman has said.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, deputy communications director, was asked whether Mr Trump believed Mr Comey’s denial.

"No, I don't think he does," she told Good Morning America, on Monday morning.

UWDude
03-08-2017, 11:09 PM
What is "real news"?


Well, for one, wikileaks has a 100% accuracy rate.

*HEAD SHOT!*

UWDude
03-08-2017, 11:11 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/06/donald-trump-does-not-believe-james-comeys-insistence-trump/

A story where one person says what another person believes about what the news said a person said, but did not quote directly.

a k a

Fake news.

Totally pointless ink on paper and pixels on screen.

UWDude
03-08-2017, 11:14 PM
What is "real news"?

News that quotes named officials, and not "sources" and "anonymous sources" and "experts on the subject" without saying who the experts are.

Learning anything yet Zip?

Need more clarification abotu what real news looks like? I know all you do is read fake news, so you probably haven't seen real news in a decade, but if you need more help discerning fake from real, I can help you. Maybe even end your zombie infection, and bring you to the woke state.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 11:20 PM
News that quotes named officials, and not "sources" and "anonymous sources" and "experts on the subject" without saying who the experts are.

Learning anything yet Zip?

Need more clarification abotu what real news looks like? I know all you do is read fake news, so you probably haven't seen real news in a decade, but if you need more help discerning fake from real, I can help you. Maybe even end your zombie infection, and bring you to the woke state.

Trump never quoted anybody in his claims his hotel was bugged so that makes it "fake news" I guess.

CPUd
03-08-2017, 11:22 PM
Trump never quoted anybody in his claims his hotel was bugged so that makes it "fake news" I guess.

http://i.imgur.com/GwrCqee.gif

UWDude
03-08-2017, 11:22 PM
Trump never quoted anybody in his claims his hotel was bugged so that makes it "fake news" I guess.

Trump didn't have to quote anybody. Trump said it. So that is real news. Trump is not an anonymous source.

But keep guessing about truth from fiction.

TheCount
03-08-2017, 11:30 PM
Don't run away from the fact you should start providing refutations

Yes, yes, I'll get started proving a negative right away.



I think we ALL deserve to here your analysis of what was going on with comet ping pong, alefantis, and the podesta brothers, as well as wikileaks pay for play schemes in the Clinton Foundation.

All you do is dismiss, but you don't provide solid reason to dismiss.I don't need a reason to dismiss. You need a reason to get me to pay attention. Playing magic eye with emails to visualize a massive conspiracy with no victims and no witnesses doesn't mean a lot to me.

TheCount
03-08-2017, 11:43 PM
He has sent it to the house intelligence committee, as he feels that is the best way to deal with it.He asked them to investigate without sending them any evidence.


And the house intelligence committee is already summoning people to testify on the subject.Yes, it's going to be fantastic.

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 11:49 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/house-intel-hold-russia-hearing-month-45978079

Another Republican member of Trump's election staff (and head of the Intelligence Committee who will investigate such matters) says no evidence has been seen:


House intel chair: No evidence of Trump's wiretap claim

The top Republican on the House intelligence committee said he has not seen any evidence to back President Donald Trump's claim that the Obama administration wiretapped him during the 2016 campaign and suggested the news media were taking the president's weekend tweets too literally.

"The president is a neophyte to politics — he's been doing this a little over a year," Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., told reporters Tuesday. "I think a lot of the things he says, I think you guys sometimes take literally."

On Saturday, Trump tweeted: "Is it legal for a sitting President to be 'wire tapping' a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!" He followed up with: "How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!"

Top former Obama administration officials have refuted Trump's claims. Trump asked Nunes' committee and the other congressional committees investigating Russia's interference in the 2016 election to look into this matter.

Nunes, who was a member of Trump's transition team, said whether the Obama administration had secret warrants to listen to Trump or his associates during the campaign would have been part of his committee's investigation regardless.

UWDude
03-08-2017, 11:51 PM
He asked them to investigate without sending them any evidence.

Yes, it's going to be fantastic.

Oh, I think it will be the same dog and pony nonsense show it always is.

But the documents that Sessions will be handed.....

Zippyjuan
03-08-2017, 11:52 PM
Another Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee: http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/tom-cotton-no-evidence-wiretap-trump-tower/2017/03/05/id/776979/


Cotton: Senate Intel Has 'No Evidence' of Trump Wiretap Claim

Despite President Donald Trump's claim former President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower during the campaign, there has been no credible evidence presented to the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., says Sunday, according to Politico.

"I've seen no evidence of the allegations we've seen in the media — whether that's a potential application or denial of the application, or a submission of the application or surveillance," Cotton, an intelligence committee member, reportedly tells "Fox News Sunday" with Chris Wallace, which will air at 2 p.m.

Athan
03-08-2017, 11:56 PM
Yes, yes, I'll get started proving a negative right away.


I don't need a reason to dismiss. You need a reason to get me to pay attention. Playing magic eye with emails to visualize a massive conspiracy with no victims and no witnesses doesn't mean a lot to me.

I'd LOVE to hear you explain how this is a negative. In fact, I think ALL of us want to hear your explanation for this.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5252

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-116d3fdcd92c38a0d7f517dc3ba900d9-c

TheCount
03-08-2017, 11:57 PM
But the documents that Sessions will be handed.....Will be handed? He's in charge of the Justice Department. They don't need to be handed a judge's wiretap order, they would have already had it.

They're going to find precisely fuck and all. And if Democrats pick up seats in 2018... this stupidity will turn into Benghazi 2.0 with 20 separate investigations spending 2 years and $10 mill to all come to the same conclusion.

UWDude
03-09-2017, 12:01 AM
Will be handed? He's in charge of the Justice Department. They don't need to be handed a judge's wiretap order, they would have already had it.

They're going to find precisely $#@! and all. And if Democrats pick up seats in 2018... this stupidity will turn into Benghazi 2.0 with 20 separate investigations spending 2 years and $10 mill to all come to the same conclusion.

What conclusion is that?

TheCount
03-09-2017, 12:11 AM
I'd LOVE to hear you explain how this is a negative.Proving that a thing does not exist is proving a negative. For example, I'd love to hear you explain how there is not a teapot in orbit around the moon. Please provide links proving its nonexistence to me.




https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-116d3fdcd92c38a0d7f517dc3ba900d9-cOh no, they're having a pool party! How dare they?! More magic eye bullshit.

Also, the part of your supposed body of evidence that you think best proves the definitely happening things is an email about a pool party wherein it is said that some relatives of Hillary's Chief of Staff are going to attend? What happened to trafficking child sex slaves locked in the basement of a pizza place? That seems completely at odds with a conspiracy that involves 'we're all going to going to share-fuck our own (grand)children amongst ourselves at a farm in Virginia.'

UWDude
03-09-2017, 12:13 AM
What conclusion is that?



Also, nice assumption I meant documents from the justice department.

Reality is coming, again.

Athan
03-09-2017, 12:17 AM
Proving that a thing does not exist is proving a negative. For example, I'd love to hear you explain how there is not a teapot in orbit around the moon. Please provide links proving its nonexistence to me.


Oh no, they're having a pool party! How dare they?! More magic eye bull$#@!.

Also, the part of your supposed body of evidence that you think best proves the definitely happening things is an email about a pool party wherein it is said that some relatives of Hillary's Chief of Staff are going to attend? What happened to trafficking child sex slaves locked in the basement of a pizza place? That seems completely at odds with a conspiracy that involves 'we're all going to going to share-$#@! our own (grand)children amongst ourselves at a farm in Virginia.'

lol omfg. Wow, you lost all credibility. That's right the whole thing is a pool party.

What type of pool party was being referenced here then? You know the "euthanasia" type of pool party.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGlZifc1kvY

TheCount
03-09-2017, 12:18 AM
What conclusion is that?If you're asking about the Benghazi conclusion, here you go, hope you're not sleepy: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-114hrpt848/pdf/CRPT-114hrpt848.pdf

If you're wondering about future Trumpghazi conclusions, it will be that they found fuck and all, like I said. Nothing. Nada. No super amazing smoking gun evidence about Russian election hacking, connections with the Trump campaign, or proof of even a single one of Trump's bullshit claims. Whole lot of 'oh, is that all? I'm super glad we spent $10 million dollars on that." But they'll keep investigating and investigating and investigating until it's the next Presidential campaign. Benghazi 2.0, like I said. The type of shit that's been on the news for the last 60 days will continue for the next 4 years.

TheCount
03-09-2017, 12:19 AM
Also, nice assumption I meant documents from the justice department.

Reality is coming, again.Cool. Could you elaborate on the type of reality, and maybe a timeframe? I need some more sig quotes of things that aren't going to happen.

Athan
03-09-2017, 12:24 AM
And by the way, if it was just a "pool party" why specify the ages of the "entertainers" in an email? To a dude with the type of art he has in his home that involves torturing children?

Gotta crash, but expecting to hear some hilarious excuses from you tomorrow, and that Princess Bride image to dismiss it.

UWDude
03-09-2017, 12:24 AM
Cool. Could you elaborate on the type of reality, and maybe a timeframe? I need some more sig quotes of things that aren't going to happen.

Mm mhmmm.. You mean like Trump winning the election? I was kind of right on that, and you and your "trump is gonna throw it to hillary" conspiracy was way off base, wasn't it?

Don't worry about it.

I'll bookmark this thread, and shove your face in it when the time comes, if you can even show it anymore, after being embarrassed time and time and time again like you already have been.

I'd like to spell it out... ....but I think I'd rather let it play out the way its going to play out, without giving the gamers watching any ideas how to counter it.

BTW, Bannon is next on the OMG RUSSIA scream and holler media shit show. Expect that in a few days at the most.

TheCount
03-09-2017, 12:25 AM
lol omfg. Wow, you lost all credibility. That's right the whole thing is a pool party.Oh man if you look close enough you can see a walrus in 3-D!


What type of pool party was being referenced here then? You know the "euthanasia" type of pool party.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGlZifc1kvYSo there's a public child-fuck-party at a public location, and people are recording video there, and then releasing it to the public. And yet, again, not a single photo, video clip, witness, or victim of abuse. It's strange how they seem to simultaneously have terrible and fantastic operational security. They leave all of this 'evidence' around everywhere while leaving no actual evidence. How does that work?

Weston White
03-09-2017, 07:09 AM
Should I add this to the list of definitely happening investigations will are certainly going someplace?


https://media2.giphy.com/media/uy8RuLWDL6Ez6/200_s.gif

TheCount
03-09-2017, 09:28 AM
And by the way, if it was just a "pool party" why specify the ages of the "entertainers" in an email?

To tell parents that there will be kids there that their own children can play with.




To a dude with the type of art he has in his home that involves torturing children? First, it wasn't to him. It's a party invitation to a bunch of people.

Second, dude is a lobbyist with a mansion filled with shitty modern art so that he can impress people who are impressed by things like that when he hosts parties.

Third, this is the magic eye bullshit that I was talking about. What is this, six degrees of being a pedophile? Some of his art is by an artist who paints creepy faced people doing creepy things, and also children attended a pool party. Oh, and there were drag queens at a pizza place. And someone left a napkin at a party. None of this is evidence, nor does it make me want to start a Beautiful Mind collage in my spare bedroom to try to tie all of the non-evidence together with string in order to pretend that it means something.

TheCount
03-09-2017, 09:36 AM
https://media2.giphy.com/media/uy8RuLWDL6Ez6/200_s.gif

It's intentionally retarded, but should be which instead of will.

Athan
03-09-2017, 10:43 AM
Oh man if you look close enough you can see a walrus in 3-D!

So there's a public child-$#@!-party at a public location, and people are recording video there, and then releasing it to the public. And yet, again, not a single photo, video clip, witness, or victim of abuse. It's strange how they seem to simultaneously have terrible and fantastic operational security. They leave all of this 'evidence' around everywhere while leaving no actual evidence. How does that work?

ha ha haa omg you got me laughing at how bad you are at this.....

lol, I want to hear your lawyer explain this one on the Clinton Foundation you mentioned earlier.

What did they mean on "pay for play" on this email? :toady:
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/20280

http://68.media.tumblr.com/16108f388dbf5256a45461e34aad4d55/tumblr_obys82lhUc1u8upkno1_1280.jpg

Athan
03-09-2017, 10:49 AM
And yet, again, not a single photo, video clip, witness, or victim of abuse. It's strange how they seem to simultaneously have terrible and fantastic operational security. They leave all of this 'evidence' around everywhere while leaving no actual evidence. How does that work?

Also you realize posting that evidence online is basically criminal right? They can't "hide it in plain sight" when they post such evidence, so they simply resort to discuss it with one another and images with suggestive imagery. Say you, Zippyjuan, and CPU'd are committing a cild rape crime and joke about it on the forums, or in this case covering up for it. Do you actually post the actual video? Or do you use code language to reference it to a point where they know what you mean, but others don't. Like using pizza for underage girl, cheese pizza for infant girl, and other coded language people learned from the FBI.

For instance, Biden is in a public event here, his molestation is mild because of the people and cameras around.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy07yHAgM4E

Oops, wrong vid, here you go:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sd8o3WUKP8M

Pretty sure if you kept the evidence, the police will be the one's dealing with getting it from you.

TheCount
03-09-2017, 10:55 AM
ha ha haa omg you got me laughing at how bad you are at this.....

lol, I want to hear your lawyer explain this one on the Clinton Foundation you mentioned earlier.

What did they mean on "pay for play" on this email? :toady:
https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/20280Now we're Beautiful Minding over to a completely different topic? Did you run out of totally sweet and concrete body of evidence on Pizzagate?

I don't know nor do I care what pay for play letters are. I'm sure that I could Google it to provide you some answer, but it is completely irrelevant and unimportant. The campaign is over. Hillary is over.

As I implied in my initial post, there is no investigation nor will there ever be an investigation into any of these topics, no matter how many clickbait articles Zerohedge posts. There has been a continual series of 'indictments any day now on this new topic!' since what... July? June. None of it will result in anything of note.

TheCount
03-09-2017, 10:58 AM
Also you realize posting that evidence online is basically criminal right? They can't "hide it in plain sight" when they post such evidence, so they simply resort to discuss it with one another and images with suggestive imagery. Say you, Zippyjuan, and CPU'd are committing a cild rape crime and joke about it on the forums, or in this case covering up for it. Do you actually post the actual video? Or do you use code language to reference it to a point where they know what you mean, but others don't. Like using pizza for underage girl, cheese pizza for infant girl, and other coded language people learned from the FBI.

Sherlock Homes level shit.


(By the way, cheese pizza is a 4chan term for child porn, because it shares the same first letters. That's the origin of the completely ridiculous code word concept, which began on /pol/.)



For instance, Biden is in a public event here, his molestation is mild because of the people and cameras around.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xy07yHAgM4E
New list of evidence:


A pool party.
A lost napkin.
Drag queens.
Shitty modern art.
Joe Biden.


It's all coming together!

Athan
03-09-2017, 11:01 AM
Now we're Beautiful Minding over to a completely different topic? Did you run out of totally sweet and concrete body of evidence on Pizzagate?

I don't know nor do I care what pay for play letters are. I'm sure that I could Google it to provide you some answer, but it is completely irrelevant and unimportant. The campaign is over. Hillary is over.

As I implied in my initial post, there is no investigation nor will there ever be an investigation into any of these topics, no matter how many clickbait articles Zerohedge posts. There has been a continual series of 'indictments any day now on this new topic!' since what... July? June. None of it will result in anything of note.

You referenced it in your first post! Why do you think I didn't take that one off?! And it isn't over, that pay-for-play is how officials were appointed to their positions. Officials which did more to cover up and make sure law enforcement handling of Pizzagate were mishandled. Such as Loretta Lynch who met with Bill Clinton in the tarmac, AND supposedly now may have tried to get Trump wiretapped during the election.

Want more? Here you go, laywer this one on "Killroom":

http://themillenniumreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/EwpBb47.png

Athan
03-09-2017, 11:05 AM
Sherlock Homes level $#@!.


(By the way, cheese pizza is a 4chan term for child porn, because it shares the same first letters. That's the origin of the completely ridiculous code word concept, which began on /pol/.)



New list of evidence:


A pool party.
A lost napkin.
Drag queens.
$#@!ty modern art.
Joe Biden.


It's all coming together!

By the way, I noticed you blinked and didn't explain what the drag queen was referencing. Provide us with context on what he meant, since you are dismissing what others are able to understand with the common theme of his behavior.

Athan
03-09-2017, 11:06 AM
AND, you didn't explain why Joe Biden is basically molesting the kids. This was his reaction with learning about Anthony Weiner's bust.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1jyZOFkYek

TheCount
03-09-2017, 11:15 AM
You referenced it in your first post!

As a thing that would never go anywhere or ever become important, like I said.



Want more? Here you go, laywer this one on "Killroom":

http://themillenniumreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/EwpBb47.pngIt's a motherfucking refrigerator. Restaurants need those.

New list of evidence:


A pool party.
A lost napkin.
Drag queens.
Shitty modern art.
Joe Biden.
Motherfucking refrigerator.

Athan
03-09-2017, 11:23 AM
As a thing that would never go anywhere or ever become important, like I said.


It's a motherfucking refrigerator. Restaurants need those.

New list of evidence:


A pool party.
A lost napkin.
Drag queens.
$#@!ty modern art.
Joe Biden.
Motherfucking refrigerator.


You didn't explain why they called it kill room OR the other references that were posted by the commenters of the instagram. No wonder you are retarded. You obviously can't process information you don't want to see.

"Oh yeah this looks fun" = for a refrigerator?
"mama big" = for a refrigerator?
"KILLROOM" = for a refrigerator?
"Just rinse it off when you are done" = for a refrigerator?
"Murder" = for a refrigerator?
"Drunk tank" = for a refrigerator?
"wwdjd" = for a refrigerator?
"Just a pile of money under a sheet" = for a refrigerator?
"where the werewolves lock themselves during a full moon" = for a refrigerator?

People aren't reacting to just a fridge you fuxin coxsox. It is what they are saying they are going to use it for and that they all seem to know already what it will be used for which seems to have little do with storing Red Barron pizza. They know the implications from just seeing an image of a "motherfucking refrigerator".

TheCount
03-09-2017, 11:36 AM
You didn't explain why they called it kill room OR the other references that were posted by the commenters of the instagram.

They also said it's for werewolves. Do you believe that too?

Also, today I learned that evidence comes from instagram comments.



People aren't reacting to just a fridge you fuxin coxsox. It is what they are saying they are going to use it for and that they all seem to know already what it will be used for which seems to have little do with storing Red Barron pizza. They know the implications from just seeing an image of a "motherfucking refrigerator".And you think I'm​ the retarded one?

Athan
03-09-2017, 11:42 AM
They also said it's for werewolves. Do you believe that too?

Also, today I learned that evidence comes from instagram comments.


And you think I'm​ the retarded one?

Two different commentators pointed out killing in some form. One pointed to werewolf which can easily be seen as letting out their inner animal urges.
Everyone can see it is just a damn large refrigerator room, until commentators and the owner show they have a different intent for its use than food storage for comet ping pong.

Now EXPLAIN what they mean just using your context and why others are likely wrong.

Because if you WERE right, the conversations would be something like this instead:

"Wow that's a huge refridgerator room"
"Wow, you all bought a large fridge room"
"You guys must be growing pretty good if you need that"
"is that where you are going to store the ingredients"
"yes"

and etc.

Athan
03-09-2017, 01:04 PM
And you think I'm​ the retarded one?
And btw, no I KNOW you are retarded.

Hell even look at your werewolf response. You are the one dismissing innuendo and other forms of subtext. I am saying things are being taking in a figurative sense while you are adamant about being literal and nothing beyond face value. So it is *I* should be using the "do you believe werewolves are real too" argument because you are the one dismissing figurative connotations, implications, undertones, and other forms of suggestive speech and subtext and ideas, not I.

timosman
01-25-2018, 12:58 PM
bump for the impressive work of the shills ....

TheCount
04-01-2018, 01:59 PM
I'll bookmark this thread, and shove your face in it when the time comes, if you can even show it anymore, after being embarrassed time and time and time again like you already have been.

I'd like to spell it out... ....but I think I'd rather let it play out the way its going to play out, without giving the gamers watching any ideas how to counter it.
1 year bump.

TheCount
03-09-2019, 04:10 PM
I'll bookmark this thread, and shove your face in it when the time comes, if you can even show it anymore, after being embarrassed time and time and time again like you already have been.

I'd like to spell it out... ....but I think I'd rather let it play out the way its going to play out, without giving the gamers watching any ideas how to counter it.

2 year bump.

Swordsmyth
03-09-2019, 04:45 PM
2 year bump.

Tick Tock.

UWDude
03-09-2019, 09:42 PM
2 year bump.

Thing with Mueller, is, he has now had about two years to prove Trump colluded :: unwitting agent of Putin == global warming :: climate change.

2 years, Meuller has seen some kind of pattern or trail of evidence proving the president of the United States was a puppet of Russia.

I don't think the public is going to forget this one.

I mean, if Trump is a puppet of Putin, why hasn't Mueller stopped him? How long is Mueller going to allow a puppet of Putin destroy the United States from within?

Two more years? After 2020, then Mueller stops Trump? Mueller didn't even reveal it in 2018! He revealed no evidence. This is the biggest crisis in the history of the United States. A president is an agent of Putin! He must be stopped, or this is the most un-urgent crisis I have ever seen.

It's like that emergency at the Wall Rand won't vote for.

I said "when the time comes". I knew it could mean up to 7 years.

What was that whole Jesse Smollet hoax all about, anyway?

False flags for good? Red Pills for all? Planned or serendipity?

Does it matter?

Thank you for reminding me of this thread. I would have forgotten it without this bump.

It's not that I care, whether one of my predictions was right or wrong. It's whether I want to expend my hatred on you.

The answer is clearly yes. The feeling is mutual.






I told them, so. So very long ago, a decade ago now. I told them, we are winning. They thought they had the "conspiracy theorists" aka "geopolitical gamers" laughed away into the hole. They thought they were winning. I said oh no, you may have the numbers, but we have the truth.

Jamesiv1
03-09-2019, 10:17 PM
I predicted this thread would get bumped.

TheCount
03-09-2019, 11:16 PM
Thing with Mueller, is, he has now had about two years to prove Trump colluded :: unwitting agent of Putin == global warming :: climate change.

2 years, Meuller has seen some kind of pattern or trail of evidence proving the president of the United States was a puppet of Russia.

I don't think the public is going to forget this one.

I mean, if Trump is a puppet of Putin, why hasn't Mueller stopped him? How long is Mueller going to allow a puppet of Putin destroy the United States from within?

Two more years? After 2020, then Mueller stops Trump? Mueller didn't even reveal it in 2018! He revealed no evidence. This is the biggest crisis in the history of the United States. A president is an agent of Putin! He must be stopped, or this is the most un-urgent crisis I have ever seen.

Why are you assuming that I believe or am emotionally invested - the way that you clearly are - in any of those things?

Contrary to your beliefs, the real world is not a saturday morning cartoon with two sides. It's possible for me to believe that your conspiracy theories are bullshit and that there's no massive Russian conspiracy at the heart of the Trump campaign and presidency.



I said "when the time comes". I knew it could mean up to 7 years.

When it still doesn't happen after 7 years, will you reconsider your worldview?



It's not that I care, whether one of my predictions was right or wrong. It's whether I want to expend my hatred on you.

The answer is clearly yes. The feeling is mutual.

I don't hate you. You're just some person on the internet who believes in things that aren't real.

TheCount
03-09-2019, 11:17 PM
I predicted this thread would get bumped.

The first accurate prediction in this thread.

UWDude
03-09-2019, 11:49 PM
When it still doesn't happen after 7 years, will you reconsider your worldview?


That's what you hate the most, isn't it?

You hate I will not believe in your fairy tale world.

It's all related.

And my worldview is too far advanced to consider the pleas of some knave to accept their fairy tale world view.
My world view is fine, thank you. I write what I write for my own reasons. I consider all things.



I don't hate you. You're just some person on the internet who believes in things that aren't real.

You sure spend a lot of energy giving worthless sarcastic comments. I mean a lot of energy. I suppose that sarcasm comes from a well of indifference.

Liars always retreat to more lies.

TheTexan
03-09-2019, 11:54 PM
If the stories are correct, Obama or his officials might even face prosecution.

https://media.giphy.com/media/jTHTaTiIKLFHa/giphy.gif

Swordsmyth
03-10-2019, 12:21 AM
https://media.giphy.com/media/jTHTaTiIKLFHa/giphy.gif
There is a first time for everything and history is full of stranger things that nobody would have believed before they happened.

TheCount
03-12-2019, 10:30 PM
That's what you hate the most, isn't it?

You hate I will not believe in your fairy tale world.

No, I don't hate it. I'm not a hateful person. Instead, I find it both amusing and incomprehensible when people go on believing their chosen prophet after his rapture prediction is proven to be false. How many times can they be lied to and yet continue to believe? So far as I can tell: Forever, but only so long as they are given a next lie which continues where the last left off.

Even though I've seen it hundreds of times, even though it's evident on this forum in a dozen different, competing varieties, it's still fun to test, to pick at it like a scab. When buying silver didn't crash JPMorgan in 2010... When TEOTWAWKI didn't happen in 2011... or 2012... or 2013... When gold didn't Schiff its way to $5,000/oz. in 2014... did minds change? No, not really. When no 'special' FISA materials are declassified... ever... will minds change? No, probably not.

That's fascinating, isn't it?



And my worldview is too far advanced

It's certainly advanced, alright. It envisions a world so complicated and improbable that it simply doesn't exist.



You sure spend a lot of energy giving worthless sarcastic comments. I mean a lot of energy. I suppose that sarcasm comes from a well of indifference.

You're reading your own emotions into others and assuming that everyone is as full of hate as you are. I don't come onto the internet to feed a burning hatred, to cultivate it and mold it into false purpose. I don't make sarcastic comments because I'm mad, I make them because the whole thing is hilarious to me.



Liars always retreat to more lies.

So true. There's always a next lie.

Think mirror. Disinformation is necessary.
The prophet wasn't wrong. He had to lie to you for your own good, no, for the good of all of us.
Trust the plan.

UWDude
03-12-2019, 10:57 PM
No, I don't hate it. I'm not a hateful person.

Still a liar. It's why I hate you. That and you are a weak minded fool, afraid of true free thought. You think I am making a fool of myself. But that is just your perspective. You have no clue why I write what I write. Through mirroring, I see your biggest fear is appearing a fool. It's not a fear to me at all, I have a much higher agenda and intention than impressing some people on a political forum, or changing some people's minds about some issue.



When buying silver didn't crash JPMorgan in 2010... When TEOTWAWKI didn't happen in 2011... or 2012... or 2013... When gold didn't Schiff its way to $5,000/oz. in 2014... did minds change? No, not really.

Mine did. I've talked about it here before. It's one of the reasons I find Austrian economics unbelievable, and no longer think about precious metals as the bedrock of an economy and currency. I bought a good deal of silver. I made a profit, but I always found the underlying theory suspect and archaic, since I previously believed, from my previous cognitions, before learning about Libertarianism, the value of currency is simply what can be attained with it, not just a rare metal.

So, yes, my mind can change. Can yours? Of course not, because you are always right. Except when I am right and you are wrong, because I am always right.

And just as I have proclaimed that yes, Socialism can work in certain situations, so too can I proclaim that yes, I am on a higher level when I have no problem changing my mind. I see nothing wrong with it, because situations change, therefore, reactions should also change. It's not like anything I do, or say, actually moves the world... ..does it? So I am but a patron in the theater of geopolitics, giving my critiques and thoughts.


It's certainly advanced, alright. It envisions a world so complicated and improbable that it simply doesn't exist.

I am a history major. The world operates in nothing like taught in schools. Even colleges. In the real world, people pay $200,000 s so their dumb kid can get into USC. Yeah, University of Southern California. Two hundred thousand... USC. How improbable is that? Did that shock you?

Didn't shock me one bit.


You're reading your own emotions into others and assuming that everyone is as full of hate as you are. I don't come onto the internet to feed a burning hatred, to cultivate it and mold it into false purpose. I don't make sarcastic comments because I'm mad, I make them because the whole thing is hilarious to me.

Sarcasm is the lowest form of humor.
Are you gonna take your shit on the road, Gene Wilder? Be the next real funny guy? You really do crack a good joke every post, don't you?

Listen to you deny yourself and your feelings. Sarcasm is the lowest form of comedy because it is easy, and usually comes from a well of scorn, which is an element of hatred. And you don't just scorn me, you hate me.


Think mirror. Disinformation is necessary.
The prophet wasn't wrong. He had to lie to you for your own good, no, for the good of all of us.
Trust the plan.

Keep your plans hidden, even from your generals ~~ Sun Tzu

Every post you write is stale; glaze-over garbage. Nobody is enamored with you, and certainly not to the degree you are enamored with me. But there are many, in far more powerful positions than you, who are far more enamored with me than you are.

Swordsmyth
03-13-2019, 12:32 AM
https://twitter.com/RepRatcliffe/status/1105658231198765057

1105658231198765057

NorthCarolinaLiberty
03-13-2019, 12:21 PM
Why are you assuming that I believe or am emotionally invested


Because you vote for Obama twice. And Hillary. Right?

acptulsa
03-13-2019, 12:33 PM
Still a liar. It's why I hate you. That and you are a weak minded fool, afraid of true free thought. You think I am making a fool of myself. But that is just your perspective. You have no clue why I write what I write. Through mirroring, I see your biggest fear is appearing a fool. It's not a fear to me at all, I have a much higher agenda and intention than impressing some people on a political forum, or changing some people's minds about some issue.




Mine did. I've talked about it here before. It's one of the reasons I find Austrian economics unbelievable, and no longer think about precious metals as the bedrock of an economy and currency. I bought a good deal of silver. I made a profit, but I always found the underlying theory suspect and archaic, since I previously believed, from my previous cognitions, before learning about Libertarianism, the value of currency is simply what can be attained with it, not just a rare metal.

So, yes, my mind can change. Can yours? Of course not, because you are always right. Except when I am right and you are wrong, because I am always right.

And just as I have proclaimed that yes, Socialism can work in certain situations, so too can I proclaim that yes, I am on a higher level when I have no problem changing my mind. I see nothing wrong with it, because situations change, therefore, reactions should also change. It's not like anything I do, or say, actually moves the world... ..does it? So I am but a patron in the theater of geopolitics, giving my critiques and thoughts.



I am a history major. The world operates in nothing like taught in schools. Even colleges. In the real world, people pay $200,000 s so their dumb kid can get into USC. Yeah, University of Southern California. Two hundred thousand... USC. How improbable is that? Did that shock you?

Didn't shock me one bit.


Sarcasm is the lowest form of humor.
Are you gonna take your $#@! on the road, Gene Wilder? Be the next real funny guy? You really do crack a good joke every post, don't you?

Listen to you deny yourself and your feelings. Sarcasm is the lowest form of comedy because it is easy, and usually comes from a well of scorn, which is an element of hatred. And you don't just scorn me, you hate me.



Keep your plans hidden, even from your generals ~~ Sun Tzu

Every post you write is stale; glaze-over garbage. Nobody is enamored with you, and certainly not to the degree you are enamored with me. But there are many, in far more powerful positions than you, who are far more enamored with me than you are.

Is it possible to diagnose megalomania over the internet?

UWDude
03-13-2019, 08:42 PM
Is it possible to diagnose megalomania over the internet?


I am but a patron in the theater of geopolitics, giving my critiques and thoughts.

It's megalomaniacal manic schizophrenic with delusions of grandeur, or epic genius or both or neither.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwhOTNQcQq4